SA Footy

In the context of finals it does, as much as possible anyway. No one can tell me it's fair to have an enforced salary cap in a competition for 8 teams and open slather for two others and all play for the same trophy that has been competed for over a hundred years. That's just f***ing stupid.

TimmiesChin wrote:

bennymacca wrote:This would just given the AFL clubs more incentive to not bother fielding their best team every week, something a lot of you have criticised on here as ruining the integrity of the comp. That would be worse than the current situation by a long way imo.

I think its time for a full AFL reserves comp, hell, even an U18 comp too

If there was a full reserves comp, or the AFL clubs moved elsewhere, they will still need top up players, and without any connection to the SANFL the SANFL clubs would be ripe for the picking... especially the 19/20/21 yo's that missed getting picked in the draft and wanting to have another crack. Best place to be seen by an AFL club is under their noses.

Its obviously the main issue. Being devils advocate, how would those players feel when the AFL club has limited injuries and they have to play for the amateurs. Would the amateurs have them? The SANFL if deciding to go it alone, obviously would not allow those guys to drop back to a SANFL team. So those 19/20/21 yo's you mention may think the SANFL is the better option to get their game back in order. After all, it wont take long for the word to get out if they manage to reverse their form.

If the AFL and SANFL go it alone, will a productive relationship result or will it become totally adversarial. Will SANFL zones be respected, will the AFL set up regional academies'? IMO the AFL would be crazy to interfere any more in the SANFL model, and in the best interest of the game allow it to have as much inter-dependence that the fans will allow. We are obviously saying the current model is too much - more independence.

make the AFL lists 55 players long.

that's enough to easily cover two sides

there will be those that miss out on a match every week given there are limited injuries and the only issue for the AFL clubs is how to manage their squads. Those players shouldn't be given an opportunity to play anywhere else.

mighty_tiger_79 wrote:make the AFL lists 55 players long.

that's enough to easily cover two sides

there will be those that miss out on a match every week given there are limited injuries and the only issue for the AFL clubs is how to manage their squads. Those players shouldn't be given an opportunity to play anywhere else.

There are about half a dozen clubs that cant pay for the current squad size, will need a heap more AFL money to beef up squads to 55

mighty_tiger_79 wrote:make the AFL lists 55 players long.

that's enough to easily cover two sides

there will be those that miss out on a match every week given there are limited injuries and the only issue for the AFL clubs is how to manage their squads. Those players shouldn't be given an opportunity to play anywhere else.

So about a dozen extra players x 18 clubs is a little over 200 extra players on afl lists. If 20% are from sa then that's 40 odd players out of the Sanfl.

bennymacca wrote:

CUTTERMAN wrote:

bennymacca wrote:

Suri wrote:It will never go back to the old model.

I like the idea of no AFL in the SANFL finals.

This would just given the AFL clubs more incentive to not bother fielding their best team every week, something a lot of you have criticised on here as ruining the integrity of the comp. That would be worse than the current situation by a long way imo.

I think its time for a full AFL reserves comp, hell, even an U18 comp too

I couldn't give a stuff if they try or not if they can't qualify for finals. To be honest I don't really get much satisfaction from watching Sturt play against either franchise reserves teams, it means half of f*** all now and should do in the future. So no difference apart from giving the main point of the comp back to the SANFL clubs, players and supporters, that being winning a flag in a fair competition.
I fully understand the effects of an AFL reserves comp would have on the SANFL and I fully understand the needs of both AFL franchises to have their reserves teams. They can compete for the minor premiership and then do as they please.

my point is barring them from finals doesnt automatically make it a fair competition

Agreed. The SANFL would be worse off than it is now with that half way house solution.
Kick them out altogether and let them play each other all season at different country venues.

johntheclaret wrote:

bennymacca wrote:my point is barring them from finals doesnt automatically make it a fair competition

Agreed. The SANFL would be worse off than it is now with that half way house solution.
Kick them out altogether and let them play each other all season at different country venues.

Kicking them out will create a real drain on the player pool, and possibly open up a Pandora's box with the existing AFL relationship. It will also be expensive and the SANFL will be made to suffer again.

I know in this thread it has been suggested plenty of times by more enlightened people than myself, but I think trial matches with the reserves teams throughout the season is now a legitimate avenue to pursue, particularly with the reserves team providing tacit approval for their top up players to participate in two games / competitions each weekend. We seem to have as many byes as pre reserves entry, so a single bye per year to play a reserves trial should not be a problem. The Power and Adelaide can play each other each alternate week allowing their adoring fans free entry and a sausage sizzle. Allow a full round of trials against the legitimate SANFL clubs. The clubs will be paid their $50K to field a full strength team. Chuck in 4 games against representative amateurs and country with respective leagues paid $50K.

Allow them to be in SANFL reserves.

Thats it.


Cross promote SANFL via AFL teams without the contamination.

Simple solution.

Lets see if entering the amateur bluff re-appears from the C&%$s.

UK Fan wrote:Allow them to be in SANFL reserves.

Thats it.


Cross promote SANFL via AFL teams without the contamination.

Simple solution.

Lets see if entering the amateur bluff re-appears from the C&%$s.

Dumbest bluff ever. Bloody hell, what good would it do to have a guy get 40 touches against a div 1 club.

stan wrote:

UK Fan wrote:Allow them to be in SANFL reserves.

Thats it.


Cross promote SANFL via AFL teams without the contamination.

Simple solution.

Lets see if entering the amateur bluff re-appears from the C&%$s.

Dumbest bluff ever. Bloody hell, what good would it do to have a guy get 40 touches against a div 1 club.

How are the AFLPA going to monitor all of the suburban grounds for player safety, spectator access, security levels etc?

stan wrote:

UK Fan wrote:Allow them to be in SANFL reserves.

Thats it.


Cross promote SANFL via AFL teams without the contamination.

Simple solution.

Lets see if entering the amateur bluff re-appears from the C&%$s.

Dumbest bluff ever. Bloody hell, what good would it do to have a guy get 40 touches against a div 1 club.

to most of us on here, yes it was a dumb bluff, and they should have been called on it. however it wasnt the dumbest ever, as their intended audience (the sanfl delegates) swallowed it hook line and sinker and enabled the crows to get their wish.....

tipper wrote:

stan wrote:

UK Fan wrote:Allow them to be in SANFL reserves.

Thats it.


Cross promote SANFL via AFL teams without the contamination.

Simple solution.

Lets see if entering the amateur bluff re-appears from the C&%$s.

Dumbest bluff ever. Bloody hell, what good would it do to have a guy get 40 touches against a div 1 club.

to most of us on here, yes it was a dumb bluff, and they should have been called on it. however it wasnt the dumbest ever, as their intended audience (the sanfl delegates) swallowed it hook line and sinker and enabled the crows to get their wish.....

Tripodi knew it was a blatant lie. Pickard told him to ignore it and he did.

Either way IF the AFL clubs are kicked out it will be a victory for the Pseudos Centurions Topsy Dutchys Off The Rails of this world who stood by their guns to abandon there football club for the sake of the competition.

Not the weak as pish Festers of this comp.

UK Fan wrote:

tipper wrote:

stan wrote:

UK Fan wrote:Allow them to be in SANFL reserves.

Thats it.


Cross promote SANFL via AFL teams without the contamination.

Simple solution.

Lets see if entering the amateur bluff re-appears from the C&%$s.

Dumbest bluff ever. Bloody hell, what good would it do to have a guy get 40 touches against a div 1 club.

to most of us on here, yes it was a dumb bluff, and they should have been called on it. however it wasnt the dumbest ever, as their intended audience (the sanfl delegates) swallowed it hook line and sinker and enabled the crows to get their wish.....

Tripodi knew it was a blatant lie. Pickard told him to ignore it and he did.

Either way IF the AFL clubs are kicked out it will be a victory for the Pseudos Centurions Topsy Dutchys Off The Rails of this world who stood by their guns to abandon there football club for the sake of the competition.

Not the weak as pish Festers of this comp.

Agreed UK. good post

Was flicking through the Inside Footy newspaper at lunch today and noticed they had an interview with Roy Laird. Not for the first time Roy delivered a passionate rant on the subject, under the headline "AFL sides are a farce" (or something along those lines). Again credit to Roy for saying what most supporters feel. As Roy stated, there are only two winners in this arrangement, the AFL sides.

Quick fix is to just play September finals footy with 8 SANFL clubs ie. top 4 fight it out, and the two cancers can play with each other till they go blind
We never promised them premiership glory in the SANFL did we?
Piss em off after their 18 games are done!

No AFL in the SANFL!

holden78 wrote:Quick fix is to just play September finals footy with 8 SANFL clubs ie. top 4 fight it out, and the two cancers can play with each other till they go blind
We never promised them premiership glory in the SANFL did we?
Piss em off after their 18 games are done!

Problem is that will cheapen the competition even further. Imagine Port Adelaide supporters talking about the rest of the clubs playing off for a chip packet or something as the winners of the leftovers.

Look Good In Leather wrote:

holden78 wrote:Quick fix is to just play September finals footy with 8 SANFL clubs ie. top 4 fight it out, and the two cancers can play with each other till they go blind
We never promised them premiership glory in the SANFL did we?
Piss em off after their 18 games are done!

Problem is that will cheapen the competition even further. Imagine Port Adelaide supporters talking about the rest of the clubs playing off for a chip packet or something as the winners of the leftovers.

Some I know already do.

After last year's GF some were happy to point at that Norwood had won a "Reserves Comp". Seems some Port supporters have the same thoughts on the SANFL that the AFL clubs do

Just looking at the results of the Port Reserves Reserves vs West Adelaide. Although they won by 73 points I am more concerned that this side actually exists. Where do they get the players from. They have no zone anymore but seem to have a massive advantage over what the Crows reserves have. I believe the crows just pick up any available country players not aligned to SANFL clubs. Can anyone explain where their players come from.

The below are the rules

THE South Australian Football Commission has ratified changes to the Port Adelaide’s player regulation rules in the SANFL League competition for 2015.

Port Adelaide participated in a review of the player regulations, which allows it to contract players to play for the club in its SANFL League and Academy sides for a set payment fee, along with the SANFL and Adelaide Crows.

The primary change to the regulations currently impacting Port Adelaide will see an age limit applied to new recruits for the Magpies.

From 2015, all new Port Adelaide recruits must be under the age of 23.

Contracts for all of the club’s SANFL players will only be permitted for a term of up to one year, however contracted players will be eligible to have their deals renewed at the end of each season for another period of up to one year.

Contracted players will not be forced to leave the club after they turn 23, should the club elect to extend their contract for another season.

Players must also be recruited from within South Australia, however that rule will not be applied retrospectively.

That means players like Anthony Biemans will be permitted to play on with the club if it chooses to renew his contract.

On the whole, it means little will change for those SANFL players currently contracted to the club, but Port Adelaide will need to abide by the new rules for all future recruits.

Port Adelaide chief operating officer Stephen Dawes said the changes still allowed the club to proceed with its aims of having a genuine grassroots involvement in the League for the future.

“The SANFL has engaged us through the process and we provided valuable feedback into the player regulations model for our club next year,” Mr Dawes told portadelaidefc.com.au.

“We believe these changes will have little if any adverse effect on the football program we put in place at the end of 2013 and have run throughout this season.

“What it means is that Port Adelaide can continue to recruit and develop Under-23 players from SA in our League and Academy sides next year, which we believe is a wonderful thing.”

The SANFL’s player regulations for Port Adelaide are able to be review at the end of each minor round season as part of an agreement entered into by the club and League last year.